Question for those who watched it via Sky was silverwood as bad as we thought or was it not as ut and dry as we thought.

I'm up to half time so far and it's a yes from me!

watched the game again last night when i got in and its another yes from me!

Very poor in first half, average in second

webb should have walked. silverwood (and support crew) bottled it. it looked bad at the time, and imo bad on the box.

silverwood seemed reluctant to take advice on certain calls, the sykes "held" incident being one of note which could have led to a leeds try. i thought this was very poor given the support team he had at his disposal.

the brent webb try - well had he not referred it i don't think that any of us would have complained. it looked a good try at the time, and on review i would still have given it.

the wilkes shot on burrow, was more burrow simply running into a bigger man. not sure it was worth a penalty, but understandable i would say.

sinfield seemed to be screaming at the ref less yesterday, perhaps silverwood had made it clear that he wasn't going to stand for it?

i didn't think he had a great game, but not a horrendous one either.

I thought the fact he allowed both sides latitude at PTB was a plus point and he allowed the game to flow.

Mr Thaler appears to have problems with consistency - he had no hesitation in dismissing Puletua last week, but couldn't help Mr Silverwood with the Webb incident, which was just about as clear an example of illegal contact that you'll ever see. Watching all the officials bottle it was cringeworthy - credit to Brian Mac for doing what they didn't have the balls to do.

Wilkes v Burrow was borderline - it didn't look deliberate and was probably made worse by the disparity in size of the players involved. One of the rare instances where 'on report' was probably appropriate.

Thought he had a great game. He just let the players get on with it at the PTB, Aussie style, which makes for a much better match as we donn`t have 15 plus pens for holding down. Thought he used the video ref well and as always was not helped by his linemen re forward passes. Think it must be a near impossible job to decide if a shoulder hit is legal or not, the sooner this is outlawed the better.

Thought he was very insonsistent on PTB/ball-steal decisions and his random decision generator generally favoured Wakefield this time.

Both the high-shot decisions were right IMO. Enough mitigating factors in both (Webb jumping to block kick, Burrow's height) to question intent so red cards difficult to give. On report fair.

Video-ref try should have stood given that Kirmond (?) basically ran past Hall to tackle Ward off the ball, so was in no way obstructed in getting to the ball-carrier.

The one where the ball hit Sykes on the leg and he gave them another six made me laugh. Some bizare decisions to say the least.

I thought the decision to penalise Sykes for playing on after he was tackled seemed harsh, but having watched it back, I think he explains on the field that the new rule about not hearing the ref's call only applies to a pass - did I imagine that?

he may have explained the ruling and why it only applies to the ref's call, but it doesn't explain why silverwood actually thought he was tackled when it was clear to us all that sykes was anything but held!